PDA

View Full Version : Response Thread From Libertarian Post



Kathianne
04-18-2015, 10:37 AM
Some of us had a lengthy discussion, (hasn't ended?):

http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?49269-Libertarians&p=731310#post731310

In my conclusion I added an editorial point that others may wish to respond to. I'm only copying the salient point and Jim's response to it, those that wish to read the whole thing may link back to the thread:


I've spent more time on this than I really meant to for two reasons:

...

2. Speaking as a member, not staff, I've found the level of discussion on most issues over the past months or even years to have deteriorated to the point that there is really little to see here. It seems to me that most interactions between those that have ideas actually worth addressing have fallen to the level of name calling and other forms of derision. There's little or no depth to those that start off alright, someone will derail by jumping in to bring the tone back to divisiveness rather than discussion. Is there some hidden forum where tallies are being kept for derailed threads? :laugh2:

IMO much of the pitting of a group of posters against an individual has created what we now have. In the most recent case what's disturbing to me is that the 'group' and the 'individual' actually are not philosophically opposed on the big issues, but rather for the details and the presumed and projected differences of the individual by the group.

I've 'known' all the posters for a long time, most since they joined. All are good people from what I 'know' of them. All are capable of discussion, so why not try it?

I tried to keep my interactions in this thread respectful, wasn't hard for me to do, I like Drummond. I don't have to agree with all of his premises however. I don't have to agree or accept what I consider to be projections or 'all knowing statements,' indeed that is the point of discussions/debates, to defend one's own ideas. Sometimes both of us got snarky, but not to the point that the discussion was lost. As I think was demonstrated, he didn't agree with all of what I wrote either.

Jim tried to address this problem not so long ago, several times. He'd like a more interesting board with more posters. This cannot happen when visitors look upon thread after thread of name calling, 5 posts of smilies and claps for a post that says, "XXX, liberal or fascist" and that is all. Take the time please, to address a point, not the poster.

He has always tried to provide what members want, i.e. Tyr basically has his own forum for his poetry; Tailfins has the technology section that he is the most prolific; dmp and NT have the photography section that I for one wish they'd use even more often, (others too). Those that wish to mud wrestle should take it to the cage, leaving those that want to discuss/debate political or societal or world events the top of the board.

To say the board leans 'conservative' is hyperbole with the word 'leans,' even Gabby has a gun! She's our token liberal.

It's become a sad state when someone is called a 'liberal' or 'traitor' for questioning due process or any of a number of constitutional rights. I think what was once 'knee jerk' responses to the likes of a Maineman have become part of what is expected responses. I do wish/hope that some reasonable discussions will follow.


2. Speaking as a member, not staff, I've found the level of discussion on most issues over the past months or even years to have deteriorated to the point that there is really little to see here. It seems to me that most interactions between those that have ideas actually worth addressing have fallen to the level of name calling and other forms of derision. There's little or no depth to those that start off alright, someone will derail by jumping in to bring the tone back to divisiveness rather than discussion. Is there some hidden forum where tallies are being kept for derailed threads? :laugh2:

IMO much of the pitting of a group of posters against an individual has created what we now have. In the most recent case what's disturbing to me is that the 'group' and the 'individual' actually are not philosophically opposed on the big issues, but rather for the details and the presumed and projected differences of the individual by the group.

I've 'known' all the posters for a long time, most since they joined. All are good people from what I 'know' of them. All are capable of discussion, so why not try it?

I tried to keep my interactions in this thread respectful, wasn't hard for me to do, I like Drummond. I don't have to agree with all of his premises however. I don't have to agree or accept what I consider to be projections or 'all knowing statements,' indeed that is the point of discussions/debates, to defend one's own ideas. Sometimes both of us got snarky, but not to the point that the discussion was lost. As I think was demonstrated, he didn't agree with all of what I wrote either.

Jim tried to address this problem not so long ago, several times. He'd like a more interesting board with more posters. This cannot happen when visitors look upon thread after thread of name calling, 5 posts of smilies and claps for a post that says, "XXX, liberal or fascist" and that is all. Take the time please, to address a point, not the poster.

He has always tried to provide what members want, i.e. Tyr basically has his own forum for his poetry; Tailfins has the technology section that he is the most prolific; dmp and NT have the photography section that I for one wish they'd use even more often, (others too). Those that wish to mud wrestle should take it to the cage, leaving those that want to discuss/debate political or societal or world events the top of the board.

To say the board leans 'conservative' is hyperbole with the word 'leans,' even Gabby has a gun! She's our token liberal.

It's become a sad state when someone is called a 'liberal' or 'traitor' for questioning due process or any of a number of constitutional rights. I think what was once 'knee jerk' responses to the likes of a Maineman have become part of what is expected responses. I do wish/hope that some reasonable discussions will follow.

jimnyc
04-18-2015, 10:40 AM
Very well said. I often think that the threads degrading, and other persistent fights/debates, are more based on perception, and more often from personal dislike. Every single member here is quite capable of awesome input and good debate. Sadly, those smarts are far too often used for folks to 'fight' with one another. And yes, no blame, as I see the whole thing more or less as circular. What I mean by that is that it goes around to an extent. One day one person, the next day another. Sometimes I read the awesome input, then the next thread I see the degradation has already killed a thread. I would move the majority of threads to the cage, but that would be an awful lot of threads, and then within hours it starts again in good threads.

And please, before anyone thinks I'm pointing, laying the blame game and such, I'm not. Read again where I said ALL are capable of the great posts, I've seen it. But if anyone is honest, they can look at such threads and see that many stop responding or don't respond at all, as they don't want to get involved. This isn't blaming, that's just the reality of things. If we ALL want things to grow, and get more members posting, we have to offer a reason for folks to register and post.

Also before anyone gets upset, I once again take my own responsibility. For example, Revelarts and I often disagree. Sometimes I get a little off track and get a tad ornery with him. Just recently, AGAIN, I had to send a message along and have a discussion with him, to apologize for my wording and such. While I'll continue to disagree and debate with him, and likely say stupid stuff again, I try to keep things cool and respectful, even if I do fail here and there. It happens, then we get back on the bicycle and try again. :)

jimnyc
04-18-2015, 10:42 AM
I edited and put my post into my own post, so others don't mistakenly think you wrote that, Kath. :) Future readers will now read this post and be like WTF? :)

Kathianne
04-18-2015, 10:44 AM
I edited and put my post into my own post, so others don't mistakenly think you wrote that, Kath. :) Future readers will now read this post and be like WTF? :)

Thanks for that! I wanted to get up a response section ASAP, so that the thread didn't derail. Then I got stuck in pm's before I could edit! :thumb:

Tyr-Ziu Saxnot
04-18-2015, 11:49 AM
Always a great problem how to increase board membership, and not invite in a free for all, chaotic mess.
Very true, this site needs more liberals, opposition and not strong right-wing members(we have abundance of those now ;))...

If most everybody is a steak lover , then getting lobster on the menu is a hard sell.

Getting members to stop sniping at each other is always a delicate issue unless one wants to fly with the banning paddle...

I can only speak for me but I will be civil to my lone nemesis here and hope for the best...

The rest of my thoughts I sent in a pm to Kat. She is free to share those with the other admin here..

Just that I encourage my friends to pay heed and try to help with this as best as they can!
For who among us does not want this board to thrive and prosper? - Tyr

jimnyc
04-18-2015, 11:59 AM
Getting members to stop sniping at each other is always a delicate issue unless one wants to fly with the banning paddle...

I can only speak for me but I will be civil to my lone nemesis here and hope for the best...

No banning paddles. :)

There's no forcing of being civil, or expectations that the full civility will be there in every post of every thread. But I think if we all made a little bit of an effort to try we would see much better threads, resulting in much better responses.

At least until the next time one of you bastards dares disagree with me! :lol:

Kathianne
04-18-2015, 12:15 PM
No banning paddles. :)

There's no forcing of being civil, or expectations that the full civility will be there in every post of every thread. But I think if we all made a little bit of an effort to try we would see much better threads, resulting in much better responses.

At least until the next time one of you bastards dares disagree with me! :lol:

My battery is about to die, quick input. I'm not for banning, I'm for folks that joined a messageboard to discuss/debate remembering why they first joined. It wasn't to be denigrated or to have their ass kissed.

It's good to have friends, it's good to acknowledge points one agrees with or that make one laugh or just think.

It's not so good when a 'group think' sets in, locking out any voices that aren't in lockstep. IMO one can either try to persuade the dissenter or one can destroy their argument, but it's bad form to destroy the poster rather than the post.

Drummond argued strongly for his position, yet didn't resort to calling me 'liberal.' When he moved in what I saw as 'unfair tactics, even logical fallacies,' I called out, but neither of us attacked each other, just ideas.

It's not hard, if one respects the other. Perhaps we can set this as a trend to continue?

tailfins
04-18-2015, 01:42 PM
It wasn't to.... have their ass kissed.

That's why people become message board mods or Homeowners Association Presidents. Personally, I prefer cash for my work. If flattery can GET you free labor, then you're on the sweet side of the deal.

Kathianne
04-18-2015, 01:56 PM
That's why people become message board mods or Homeowners Association Presidents. Personally, I prefer cash for my work. If flattery can GET you free labor, then you're on the sweet side of the deal.

Interesting observation. Personally seems that HOA Presidents choose to run for position for either personal agenda or really wanting to make community a better place, much like politicians.

OTOH, has little to do with either the points raised regarding the original thread or reason for having this OT thread in announcement.

Seems though perhaps it served to get some personal hostility off for staff. Hope it helps you.

Kathianne
04-18-2015, 02:25 PM
I want to thank Tyr on the board for comments and suggestions on how we may all go about improving this little community. Thank you, Tyr.

BTW, part of our discussion was on the poetry forum, if you haven't looked around there, please do. Feel free to add your own poetry or prose if the spirit moves you. Tyr would love some company! :beer:

Tyr-Ziu Saxnot
04-18-2015, 02:29 PM
That's why people become message board mods or Homeowners Association Presidents. Personally, I prefer cash for my work. If flattery can GET you free labor, then you're on the sweet side of the deal.

Becoming well known for being snarky some people seem to aspire to..
I too, prefer cash but here we post freely and pay no dues.. The least we can do is try to improve conditions when asked to try to help out IMHO.
There is flattery, false flattery and sincere appreciation/agreement. The last one is to be encouraged since it reflects highly upon the poster...-Tyr

Kathianne
04-18-2015, 02:33 PM
I'm off to work, tethering my laptop to charge it up. See you all tonight.

Perianne
04-18-2015, 05:04 PM
Always a great problem how to increase board membership, and not invite in a free for all, chaotic mess.

Very true, this site needs more liberals, opposition and not strong right-wing members(we have abundance of those now.....

jim, I was supposed to send you a PM about my views. This ^^^ is exactly what I meant to send, but I feared it would offend you. Silly of me, I know. I didn't want to criticize what you have made.

Me too, I don't like when people here call one another "stupid", "liar", and the like. Everyone here is intelligent; some just have different viewpoints. I did not feel the "Libertarian" thread got out of hand. I loved it.

Until we quit calling people like Gabby names, vicious names, I don't see the board growing. As much as we all dislike the liberal viewpoint, they do provoke discussing and debate. Right now we all mostly congratulate each other on saying some conservative this-or-that in a different way than what we have said.

I caution of allowing too many liberals. I was on a site for a couple of years where the liberals and homosexuals came in. It ruined the board. It wasn't that they would post stuff about queers news and concerns, it was that every new post was a new thread. Soon, when you clicked "What's new", it was all about queers and liberal stuff. Many good conservatives and liberatarians left.

Nearly everyone here treats me kindly, as I do you. I wish we would do that to Gabby and other liberals. Even FJ.

Anyway, just my two cents.

tailfins
04-18-2015, 06:12 PM
jim, I was supposed to send you a PM about my views. This ^^^ is exactly what I meant to send, but I feared it would offend you. Silly of me, I know. I didn't want to criticize what you have made.

Me too, I don't like when people here call one another "stupid", "liar", and the like. Everyone here is intelligent; some just have different viewpoints. I did not feel the "Libertarian" thread got out of hand. I loved it.

Until we quit calling people like Gabby names, vicious names, I don't see the board growing. As much as we all dislike the liberal viewpoint, they do provoke discussing and debate. Right now we all mostly congratulate each other on saying some conservative this-or-that in a different way than what we have said.

I caution of allowing too many liberals. I was on a site for a couple of years where the liberals and homosexuals came in. It ruined the board. It wasn't that they would post stuff about queers news and concerns, it was that every new post was a new thread. Soon, when you clicked "What's new", it was all about queers and liberal stuff. Many good conservatives and liberatarians left.

Nearly everyone here treats me kindly, as I do you. I wish we would do that to Gabby and other liberals. Even FJ.

Anyway, just my two cents.

If Gabby don't start nothin', there won't be nothin'.

LongTermGuy
04-18-2015, 08:48 PM
and yet you don't know WHY. You can search for my posts, where I felt I was wrong on some of my reasoning back then, and why I wasn't in toto.


Feel better knocking someone out of your gang? Or is this just an attempt to say that if one doesn't agree wholly with your positions, they are *gasp* a liberal?




Perhaps because when she spoke, she addressed many of the assumed 'truths' of socialism, breaking many of the confines of what had been assumed 'facts' of the European movement towards socialism since Bismarck? Many of her speeches sounded much more 'American' in their thinking than European. As you've repeated emphasized though, she was confined to dealing with the system that laid before, she still had to address the problem through the BIG government solution, at that point in time, she couldn't do what Reagan did with PATCO. She was as 'Conservative' as the system would allow in her actions.

Feel better for chiming in?




I've spent more time on this than I really meant to for two reasons:

1. I think that the US central government has become too big, too involved in our everyday lives, too expensive and inefficient. With the 'right leader' this country could fall into dictatorship. In many ways it has. If the executive powers in DC keep expanding, Congress will continue to diminish which was intended to be the voice of the People.

While the GOP tends more towards my priorities of the federal government, those in the positions of power are still much like the European right's version of socialism. I'm more in favor of our founders' vision for our country. I don't want 'a better' national health care or national education system. I want the individuals, the small shop owners, the corporations, the city halls, the state governments, the federal government all doing what they are supposed to do. For those individuals, the most vulnerable that are unable to care for themselves, whose families cannot or will not care for them, society must care for. The question remaining is from which level is the best care to be found? I don't think DC is the answer.

2. Speaking as a member, not staff, I've found the level of discussion on most issues over the past months or even years to have deteriorated to the point that there is really little to see here. It seems to me that most interactions between those that have ideas actually worth addressing have fallen to the level of name calling and other forms of derision. There's little or no depth to those that start off alright, someone will derail by jumping in to bring the tone back to divisiveness rather than discussion. Is there some hidden forum where tallies are being kept for derailed threads? :laugh2:

IMO much of the pitting of a group of posters against an individual has created what we now have. In the most recent case what's disturbing to me is that the 'group' and the 'individual' actually are not philosophically opposed on the big issues, but rather for the details and the presumed and projected differences of the individual by the group.

I've 'known' all the posters for a long time, most since they joined. All are good people from what I 'know' of them. All are capable of discussion, so why not try it?

I tried to keep my interactions in this thread respectful, wasn't hard for me to do, I like Drummond. I don't have to agree with all of his premises however. I don't have to agree or accept what I consider to be projections or 'all knowing statements,' indeed that is the point of discussions/debates, to defend one's own ideas. Sometimes both of us got snarky, but not to the point that the discussion was lost. As I think was demonstrated, he didn't agree with all of what I wrote either.

Jim tried to address this problem not so long ago, several times. He'd like a more interesting board with more posters. This cannot happen when visitors look upon thread after thread of name calling, 5 posts of smilies and claps for a post that says, "XXX, liberal or fascist" and that is all. Take the time please, to address a point, not the poster.

He has always tried to provide what members want, i.e. Tyr basically has his own forum for his poetry; Tailfins has the technology section that he is the most prolific; dmp and NT have the photography section that I for one wish they'd use even more often, (others too). Those that wish to mud wrestle should take it to the cage, leaving those that want to discuss/debate political or societal or world events the top of the board.

To say the board leans 'conservative' is hyperbole with the word 'leans,' even Gabby has a gun! She's our token liberal.

It's become a sad state when someone is called a 'liberal' or 'traitor' for questioning due process or any of a number of constitutional rights. I think what was once 'knee jerk' responses to the likes of a Maineman have become part of what is expected responses. I do wish/hope that some reasonable discussions will follow.


************************************************** *********
************************************************** ****************


"To say the board leans 'conservative' is hyperbole with the word 'leans,' even Gabby has a gun! She's our token liberal.

It's become a sad state when someone is called a 'liberal' or 'traitor' for questioning due process or any of a number of constitutional rights. I think what was once 'knee jerk' responses to the likes of a Maineman have become part of what is expected responses. I do wish/hope that some reasonable discussions will follow." ~


Interesting ^^^


I like to make things short and sweet...with out writing a book....***Jim has done a good job doing what he does here....Period....done...finish...


***
*Remember a couple of things....it takes two to have an argument and it takes one to derail a thread....

`​Conservatives.... DEFEND....and vary rarely (if at all) ATTACK.....Conservatives hate the back and forth arguing bullshit.....but they are there to finish it....its always the conservatives "started threads" that some leftists ~ "(Liberals)" ~ ...attack....and then `call it debating`....*Most everyone here knows whats going on....Conservatives post most of the threads here and will defend them....if not attacked...they will remain happy campers....but always open for a good DEBATE....But it seems some on the left have a different opinion on what the word Debate means....congrats on your nicely written post above...

Drummond
04-19-2015, 08:47 AM
Feel better knocking someone out of your gang? Or is this just an attempt to say that if one doesn't agree wholly with your positions, they are *gasp* a liberal?

If you seriously believe that you're offering objective comment by stating that, then you have little understanding of what I'm all about, Kathianne.

I do not have a 'gang', nor do I seek to !! I fail to see why you think I'd see things in any such terms. If people agree with me, fine. And if I agree with them, also fine. And, I support friends.

Is this your idea of forming and sustaining a 'gang' ?

My position has long been this: if others have alternative viewpoints, and want to express them, then that's something to be welcomed .. and such views can be tested on their merits, through debate. But I have a qualifier to add ... this should preferably be HONEST debate. No trickery, no psychological games-playing to substitute, dishonestly, for that debate.

We have one contributor on this forum who insists on offering bona fides for himself that I do not accept as genuine, and there have been various indications that I'm right. That very individual, now, has never been closer in revealing that the truth is as I've always said it was. Which is a good thing ... may that honesty be built upon, the final truth revealed for what it IS.


Perhaps because when she spoke, she addressed many of the assumed 'truths' of socialism, breaking many of the confines of what had been assumed 'facts' of the European movement towards socialism since Bismarck? Many of her speeches sounded much more 'American' in their thinking than European. As you've repeated emphasized though, she was confined to dealing with the system that laid before, she still had to address the problem through the BIG government solution, at that point in time, she couldn't do what Reagan did with PATCO. She was as 'Conservative' as the system would allow in her actions.

That's fair comment, I think.

Even so, it seems implicit in your summary that you think she acted as she did reluctantly. That she was hesitant in using the methodology that she did. Can you offer any evidence for any such reluctance ?

I think that you cannot. But more, you've skipped over a part of what I've already explained. As I previously said, Ted Heath reduced Government v Unions to a democratic vote, letting the voters decide its outcome. It was HEATH who was by far the more reluctant leader to see Government as solving things by wielding a big Governmental stick.

Mrs Thatcher considered Heath to be WEAK in acting in that way. Her approach was always going to be diametrically opposed to his. It was the most defining difference between them, that she would use Big Governmental authority over her insurrectionist opposition, RATHER than seek any alternatives.

She chose her approach. She considered it correct. And she was definably CONSERVATIVE, to the whole world, throughout !


I've spent more time on this than I really meant to for two reasons:

1. I think that the US central government has become too big, too involved in our everyday lives, too expensive and inefficient. With the 'right leader' this country could fall into dictatorship. In many ways it has. If the executive powers in DC keep expanding, Congress will continue to diminish which was intended to be the voice of the People.

Can I suggest this interpretation of current trends ?

Your country has an instinctive distrust of Big Government, going way back into its past. Trouble is, though, that the Left love power, and they know that to wield it, power has to be built up, concentrated, be seen to be inviolable.

In the likes of Obama, you have a power-loving Leftie who'll act even in Constitutionally questionable ways in order to get his way.

How has this come about ? How did he get the latitude to build any extent of inviolability in acting from such a standpoint ?

I suggest this - it's the American failure to see that an insistence on 'small' Government allows a vacuum, whereby people like Obama CAN exploit it.

The more power you have available to you to effect change, the more likely it is that you can bring about that change. Socialists understand that, and they understand the power of collective effort. So, their thoughts are 'collective', their biases towards a Bigger Government machinery. Why ? BECAUSE WIELDING OF POWER OVER PEOPLE IS CENTRAL TO WHAT THEY'RE ABOUT.

Libertarians don't want sovereignty over their affairs, they want SELF sovereignty. BUT, to achieve that, they need the power to manage it. The best way to do it is through the collective power that numbers gives them. This is why they form Unions.

Libertarians and the Left therefore have something basic in common .. to assure themselves of power, through strength in numbers.

Obama loves his power. He has his power base, from his position in Government. And he builds on it through legislative stricture. But ... he loves HIS PARTICULAR power. Hasn't it been a hallmark of his psychology that he defies those checks and balances which exist, when he can ?

DOESN'T THAT CONFORM TO THE LIBERTARIAN 'SELF-SOVEREIGNTY' POSITION ?

My point is this: Libertarian thought and intention IS Left-wing in nature. You fight it only through having, and wielding, the POWER necessary to do it.

MRS THATCHER DID EXACTLY THAT, USING AVAILABLE POWER FOR A CONSERVATIVE, REMEDIAL CAUSE, AS ANY GOOD CONSERVATIVE SHOULD !


While the GOP tends more towards my priorities of the federal government, those in the positions of power are still much like the European right's version of socialism. I'm more in favor of our founders' vision for our country. I don't want 'a better' national health care or national education system. I want the individuals, the small shop owners, the corporations, the city halls, the state governments, the federal government all doing what they are supposed to do. For those individuals, the most vulnerable that are unable to care for themselves, whose families cannot or will not care for them, society must care for. The question remaining is from which level is the best care to be found? I don't think DC is the answer.

All very laudible.

But please explain how you can ensure that such a status quo will of itself remain inviolable. And not successfully challenged by Left wing power bases.


2. Speaking as a member, not staff, I've found the level of discussion on most issues over the past months or even years to have deteriorated to the point that there is really little to see here. It seems to me that most interactions between those that have ideas actually worth addressing have fallen to the level of name calling and other forms of derision. There's little or no depth to those that start off alright, someone will derail by jumping in to bring the tone back to divisiveness rather than discussion. Is there some hidden forum where tallies are being kept for derailed threads? :laugh2:

On the bolded part ... I definitely agree. And I've been pitting myself against just that. Unfortunately, the party responsible for it has had no basis for regretting such behaviour, so, it's continued unchecked.

My own position is clear, and I've already repeatedly stated it. Honest, objective discussions are welcome. It does no ultimate good for any individual to fight a position advanced bogusly, pretending in something not personally believed in. The adversary who GENUINELY and HONESTLY presents a diametrically opposed argument to my own will receive all due respect. The adversary who chooses an adversarial position for the sake of it, or, to position in a way as to dishonestly identify that position as coming from something other than its true roots ... WHY should I EVER respect THAT ?


I tried to keep my interactions in this thread respectful, wasn't hard for me to do, I like Drummond. I don't have to agree with all of his premises however. I don't have to agree or accept what I consider to be projections or 'all knowing statements,' indeed that is the point of discussions/debates, to defend one's own ideas. Sometimes both of us got snarky, but not to the point that the discussion was lost. As I think was demonstrated, he didn't agree with all of what I wrote either.

Naturally, you don't have to agree with me, or believe what I say, what I know to be true. That's your right and privilege.

Nonetheless, I'm in no doubt at all that I'm expressing a true and accurate position. If I wasn't, I wouldn't be expressing it ! If you choose not to heed me, that's your choice to make.


To say the board leans 'conservative' is hyperbole with the word 'leans,' even Gabby has a gun! She's our token liberal.

You have more than one here ! But at least with Gabby, there's no, shall we say, 'lack of clarity' as to what she honestly represents about herself.


It's become a sad state when someone is called a 'liberal' or 'traitor' for questioning due process or any of a number of constitutional rights. I think what was once 'knee jerk' responses to the likes of a Maineman have become part of what is expected responses. I do wish/hope that some reasonable discussions will follow.

Still ... at least when such things are said, the one saying them does so from a position of loyalty to country and fighting for what s/he thinks is right. One of the biggest things we've lost in the UK is that very strength of patriotism and personal conviction (courtesy of Left wing societal sabotage, over decades). Regardless of any justice in your comment, the spirit which prompts such outbursts is so often a noble and laudible one.

Drummond
04-19-2015, 09:01 AM
Apologies to Kathianne. I drafted & added a fairly long-winded reply to her on the 'Libertarian' thread before realising the existence of this one.

Drummond
04-19-2015, 09:10 AM
jim, I was supposed to send you a PM about my views. This ^^^ is exactly what I meant to send, but I feared it would offend you. Silly of me, I know. I didn't want to criticize what you have made.

Me too, I don't like when people here call one another "stupid", "liar", and the like. Everyone here is intelligent; some just have different viewpoints. I did not feel the "Libertarian" thread got out of hand. I loved it.

Until we quit calling people like Gabby names, vicious names, I don't see the board growing. As much as we all dislike the liberal viewpoint, they do provoke discussing and debate. Right now we all mostly congratulate each other on saying some conservative this-or-that in a different way than what we have said.

I caution of allowing too many liberals. I was on a site for a couple of years where the liberals and homosexuals came in. It ruined the board. It wasn't that they would post stuff about queers news and concerns, it was that every new post was a new thread. Soon, when you clicked "What's new", it was all about queers and liberal stuff. Many good conservatives and liberatarians left.

Nearly everyone here treats me kindly, as I do you. I wish we would do that to Gabby and other liberals. Even FJ.

FJ is perfectly welcome to give such conduct to others, as well as to expect to receive it. This is no less than a fair and even-handed expectation.

As to the bolded part ... I simply cannot agree more !! I saw just such an example of ruination on a forum where Leftist trolls invaded it and smashed up all chance of civilised discussion. Insults, name-calling ... that was just a part of it. I learned from that experience that there are no depths a fully committed Leftie will not stoop to.

I have never seen the equivalent offered to anything like such an extent from those genuinely representing the Right.

jimnyc
04-19-2015, 09:11 AM
Apologies to Kathianne. I drafted & added a fairly long-winded reply to her on the 'Libertarian' thread before realising the existence of this one.

Looks like you put it in this thread to me? :dunno: :)

Drummond
04-19-2015, 09:20 AM
Looks like you put it in this thread to me? :dunno: :)

Just spotted. I was sure it was added to the 'Libertarian' thread ??

My computer did fail to post it, initially. But as I'd copied all my intended text before trying to post it (a habit I've adopted for this forum), I then went through the posting action a second time. Apparently on THIS thread, not the other one ...

I'm baffled.

tailfins
04-19-2015, 09:26 AM
FJ is perfectly welcome to give such conduct to others, as well as to expect to receive it. This is no less than a fair and even-handed expectation.

As to the bolded part ... I simply cannot agree more !! I saw just such an example of ruination on a forum where Leftist trolls invaded it and smashed up all chance of civilised discussion. Insults, name-calling ... that was just a part of it. I learned from that experience that there are no depths a fully committed Leftie will not stoop to.

I have never seen the equivalent offered to anything like such an extent from those genuinely representing the Right.

We don't have leftists trolls here, just big egos. If you put your thumb on the head of someone with a big ego, you get an explosion. Telling people to stop having big egos will just get you a delayed reaction explosion.

jimnyc
04-19-2015, 09:28 AM
Just spotted. I was sure it was added to the 'Libertarian' thread ??

My computer did fail to post it, initially. But as I'd copied all my intended text before trying to post it (a habit I've adopted for this forum), I then went through the posting action a second time. Apparently on THIS thread, not the other one ...

I'm baffled.

Maybe the post itself just knew where you meant to post it? Maybe it felt bad and walked over here and sat down? Posts are mysterious little buggers!! :coffee:

Drummond
04-19-2015, 09:34 AM
Maybe the post itself just knew where you meant to post it? Maybe it felt bad and walked over here and sat down? Posts are mysterious little buggers!! :coffee:

:laugh2::laugh2::laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:

... Also encouraging in its way ... the post which possesses such intelligence, that it actually achieves, and demonstrates, decision-making sentience .. ?:laugh:

jimnyc
04-19-2015, 09:36 AM
:laugh2::laugh2::laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:

... Also encouraging in its way ... the post which possesses such intelligence, that it actually achieves, and demonstrates, decision-making sentience .. ?:laugh:

Yeah, be happy, sometimes my posts just look up in the air like little retards, all alone, being ignored, because I sometimes post stupid shit!

Drummond
04-19-2015, 09:45 AM
Yeah, be happy, sometimes my posts just look up in the air like little retards, all alone, being ignored, because I sometimes post stupid shit!

Consider yourself fortunate, Jim. Mine all too often get .... :shitfan::shitfan: ....

tailfins
04-19-2015, 10:12 AM
Yeah, be happy, sometimes my posts just look up in the air like little retards, all alone, being ignored, because I sometimes post stupid shit!

Sometime I use DP as a bookmark. Whether anyone is interested in it or not, I can post things when I'm busy, then go back and look at the details of my own posts when I'm bored.

jimnyc
04-19-2015, 10:23 AM
Sometime I use DP as a bookmark. Whether anyone is interested in it or not, I can post things when I'm busy, then go back and look at the details of my own posts when I'm bored.

Are you saying that you sometimes post, and then put some thought into it after the fact? 'Splains things! :lol:

Tyr-Ziu Saxnot
04-19-2015, 11:53 AM
:laugh2::laugh2::laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:

... Also encouraging in its way ... the post which possesses such intelligence, that it actually achieves, and demonstrates, decision-making sentience .. ?:laugh:

"Sentience", tis' the first time that I have seen that word used in a coon's age.... :laugh:

As many would think you intended the word --"sentence" .. :laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:
Now we Southern boys know all too well that --"sentence" , is the amount of time da judge gives ya!- :laugh:--Tyr

Drummond
04-19-2015, 12:12 PM
[QUOTE]]

"Sentience", tis' the first time that I have seen that word used in a coon's age.... :laugh:

As many would think you intended the word --"sentence" .. :laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:
Now we Southern boys know all too well that --"sentence" , is the amount of time da judge gives ya!- :laugh:--Tyr:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

tailfins
04-19-2015, 02:44 PM
Are you saying that you sometimes post, and then put some thought into it after the fact? 'Splains things! :lol:

At least I EVENTUALLY put some thought into it.

jimnyc
04-19-2015, 06:12 PM
At least I EVENTUALLY put some thought into it.

That was lame. When addressing me, please try to prepare your insults ahead of time, with thought, so I don't get bored. :)

LongTermGuy
04-19-2015, 08:15 PM
That was lame. When addressing me, please try to prepare your insults ahead of time, with thought, so I don't get bored. :)


`...Jim...your so cold...:laugh:

jimnyc
04-20-2015, 02:09 PM
`...Jim...your so cold...:laugh:

Tailbeans knows I love him! But just the same, yeah, I am a cold bastard!

fj1200
04-20-2015, 02:41 PM
FJ is perfectly welcome to give such conduct to others...

I give it where earned. Or more accurately everyone gets it until they've proven that they aren't entitled to it.

LongTermGuy
04-20-2015, 02:47 PM
Tailbeans knows I love him! But just the same, yeah, I am a cold bastard!

​`Oh I know...just kidding...

jimnyc
04-20-2015, 02:52 PM
​`Oh I know...just kidding...

I knew you were, I just used it as an excuse to reply fuck with tailhead. He deserves it every now and again. :evilras:

tailfins
04-20-2015, 05:20 PM
I knew you were, I just used it as an excuse to reply fuck with tailhead. He deserves it every now and again. :evilras:

Sure thing Jimny Cricket. That reminds me of the baseball fan with license plate GRN SLM (green slime?).

jimnyc
04-20-2015, 05:32 PM
Sure thing Jimny Cricket. That reminds me of the baseball fan with license plate GRN SLM (green slime?).

They also have the green slime on one of those Nickelodeon shows, where they drop it on the "unsuspecting" heads of people, or those who lose certain games.

I'm trying to think of a baseball team that is green... and how do you know they were a baseball fan based on that?

tailfins
04-20-2015, 05:34 PM
They also have the green slime on one of those Nickelodeon shows, where they drop it on the "unsuspecting" heads of people, or those who lose certain games.

I'm trying to think of a baseball team that is green... and how do you know they were a baseball fan based on that?

All kinds of St.Louis Cardinals stickers.

jimnyc
04-20-2015, 05:37 PM
All kinds of St.Louis Cardinals stickers.

In that case, you should have tossed an egg at the car.